| IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE SEBI (LISTING OBLIGATIONS AND DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS) REGULATIONS, 2015, THE BOARD IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MONITORING AND REVIEWING THE BOARD EVALUATION FRAMEWORK. ADDITIONALLY, AS PER THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, THE BOARD IS REQUIRED TO UNDERTAKE A FORMAL ANNUAL EVALUATION OF ITS OWN PERFORMANCE, AS WELL AS THAT OF ITS COMMITTEES AND INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS. FURTHER, SCHEDULE IV OF THE COMPANIES ACT, 2013, PROVIDES THAT THE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS SHALL BE CONDUCTED BY THE ENTIRE BOARD, EXCLUDING THE DIRECTOR BEING EVALUATED. PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE, THE COMPANY HAS FORMULATED A POLICY FOR PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE BOARD, ITS COMMITTEES, INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS, NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS, AND THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR. THE COMPANY ALSO BENCHMARKED THE BEST PRACTICES PREVALENT IN THE INDUSTRY AS PART OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS. BASED ON THESE, A STRUCTURED EVALUATION PROCESS WAS CARRIED OUT BY THE BOARD TO ASSESS ITS OWN PERFORMANCE, ALONG WITH THAT OF ITS COMMITTEES AND INDIVIDUAL DIRECTORS. AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE FLOW OF INFORMATION BETWEEN THE MANAGEMENT AND THE BOARD. FURTHERMORE, THE COMPANY UNDERTOOK A DETAILED FAMILIARIZATION PROGRAM FOR INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS COVERING THE COMPANY’S BUSINESS, ITS MODEL, ROLES, RESPONSIBILITIES, AND RIGHTS OF DIRECTORS, AMONG OTHERS. THE NOMINATION AND REMUNERATION COMMITTEE LED THE FORMAL EVALUATION PROCESS USING INDIVIDUAL RATING MATRIX. AS PART OF THIS PROCESS, THE PERFORMANCE OF THE NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS, THE CHAIRMAN, AND THE BOARD AS A WHOLE WAS EVALUATED BY THE INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS, WHILE THE PERFORMANCE OF THE RESPECTIVE COMMITTEES AND BOTH INDEPENDENT AND NON-INDEPENDENT DIRECTORS WAS EVALUATED BY THE BOARD, EXCLUDING THE DIRECTOR BEING ASSESSED. |